MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W196861556

Sedge/Grass Meadow Restoration on Former Agricultural Land: Analysis of Establishment Success

2013· dissertation· en· W196861556 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander Joseph Healy

Notice bibliographique

RevueSUNY Digital Repository Support (State University of New York System) · 2013
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiquePeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésWetlandTussockCarexGeographyForestryAgroforestryEnvironmental scienceAgronomyEcologyBiology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Sedge/grass meadow wetland restoration was conducted at three study sites located in about 4 ha of agricultural land recently acquired by New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) adjacent to West Creek at its confluence with Braddock Bay in Hilton, Monroe County, New York. The restoration was conducted within a 75.35 to 75.60 m (IGLD1985) elevation range previously identified as capable of supporting sedge/grass meadow in Lake Ontario wetlands. This project consisted of an initial baseline survey during spring 2009, a seed-bank emergence study that began in September 2009 and terminated in early July 2010, restoration implementation during summer 2010, and follow-up after implementation during August 2010, 2011, and 2012. Data from other Lake Ontario drowned river- mouth wetlands and a study site at Kents Creek served as references. Implementation at the three study sites began with disking in May 2010 to expose fresh soil and remove much of the old plant growth. Locally-sourced wetland seed mixes, plus seeds from Canada bluejoint grass (Calamagrostis canadensis) and tussock sedge (Carex stricta), were purchased, cold-stratified, and sown with shoulder-broadcast seed spreaders in June 2010 in the study site planted areas. Plugs of Canada bluejoint grass and tussock sedge were also hand-planted in the same areas. Sections of each disked site area were left unplanted and unseeded to serve as controls. At two of the sites, natural wetland remnants, near areas dominated primarily by river bulrush (Schoenoplectus fluviatilis) in 2009, were not disked, planted, or seeded. Plant surveys were conducted in the study site planted, control, and natural wetland areas, as well as in the 2009 baseline survey, by sampling in randomly- placed 1m2 quadrats. Plant data (frequency and percent cover of species in 1m2 quadrats) were used to calculate Importance Values; species were classified according to the National List of Vascular Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands; statistical tests were performed to determine important species and total percent cover and species count differences among study site areas; and data from all three sites across all four years were analyzed by ordination using non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) in sample x Importance Value matrices. Fifteen of the 42 seeded/planted species, 38 remnant sedge/grass meadow associates, and 36 potentially problematic (agricultural weed) species were identified in study site community samples across years, and additional species continue to be found. Following restoration, seeded species diversity increased in each subsequent year, and potentially problematic species generally decreased each subsequent year. Drought conditions during 2012 likely affected survival of some wetland species with greater water demand. Control treatments on high-canopy, annual agricultural weeds by mowing at a height of about 30 cm also affected plant community changes. The seed-bank emergence study did not successfully predict ultimate community composition following implementation, likely because survival of plants from seed is often dictated by post-recruitment processes. Instead, seeded species, remnant vegetation, and nearby refuge populations seemed to contribute more to establishment in the planted areas than the original seed bank. The NMDS ordination showed that the 2009 baseline plant communities had been displaced by 2010, likely as a result of implementation actions. The ordination also showed that overall communities in the planted areas at the three sites changed from year to year and largely converged with the unplanted controls by 2012, which suggests that remnant vegetation was highly influential and nearby refuge populations made contributions as seeded species spread throughout control and planted site areas. Post-restoration sampling at the restoration sites identified 21 species that were found in the Lake Ontario drowned river-mouth wetland reference data base and six species sampled at the Kents Creek reference site. Reference data suggest that the restoration sites reflect sedge/grass meadow conditions but also contain many other species associated more commonly with disturbed sites. The future plant community at these restoration sites will likely be dependent on survival and expansion of sedge/grass meadow species, as influenced by soil moisture and competition from remnant agricultural weed species. Prolonged drought could potentially extirpate many of the seeded/planted species, especially if those conditions occurred in successive years. Monitoring results showed that competition can be mitigated by repeated, well-timed mowing that cuts taller annual plants before seed set and opens the canopy for underlying sedges and sedge/grass meadow associates currently found beneath them.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,088
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,190
Écart entre enseignants0,182 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSUNY Digital Repository Support (State University of New York System)Même sujetPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyTravaux en français237 207